¡ LIVE NOW @ live.novaramedia.com !
fees bell hooks idf data government politicians money coalition trade unions india germany fe david willetts police violence psoe boko haram national liberation organising ello tax reform rape gender secret employee strategy of refusal ttip Centre Left Media bias property rights ukraine anxiety uk uncut trident Niki Seth-Smith occupation ireland Craig McVegas publishing salmond clegg obr anarchism focus e15 charlie hebdo poverty pop culture mark duggan accessibility romanichal spending Dawkins vaga de totes revolution ubi catalan independence IndyRef help to buy romani tax review basic income egypt conservatives conference season living wage portugal rojava sexual violence YesVote christianity trolling red wedge orientalism rusell brand cameron desire northern ireland ge2012 leaders debate autonomism owen jones david cameron racism workers orange order rmt jeremy hunt music open democracy strikes fascism subversion chuka umunna travellers hague cities yes scotand adam stoneman green party cpi lse morality social cleansing student politics eurovision west bank budget2014 islamophobia sturgeon post-capitalism footwear results willetts comedians Scottish Independence no borders is carpenters warwick libertarianism labour security engels 22o ipr france mark carney eleanor penny chris grayling public sector psychiatry education jesus general election syriza podemos uaf student debt privatisation new york troika BBC modi queer marxism social housing unions solidarity radical housing network gary barlow videos world cup imf Secular Crisis jobs Race scotland obama intervention pasok finance star trek sussex work silicon valley ecb history cable Elections sport Labour Party growth russia eric pickles nurses charlie lahr health projects crisis middle east young people paul nuttall nato rotherham columnism greece sexism legal aid depression newham arran james sophie lewis madness care work justice nhs thatcher inflation ferguson tabitha bast social movements post-fordism digital media electoral fraud canada unemployment rent strike martin lewis lawrence and wishart wages books mental health welfare state political economy student movement free education antifascism arab spring glasgow immigration bouchart andrew dolan catalunya media magna carta suicide kurds uk university social networks uprising treasury theft religion ACAB production hollaback eu mark regev ual bennett cantona britain first hydra populism millbank syria prison mubarak george osborne demographics met care asia greek election europe class Gentrification pharmaceuticals pluralism international balls nus property novara wire debt homelessness austerity #copsoffcampus bonuses left hamas colonialism funerals women migrants masons iraq pablo iglesias precarity sisi safety university of london productivity inequality legitimacy geography atheism nef crimea james butler intersectionality architecture malcolm x ultras andy burnham palestine calais politics benefits police brutality student loans tsipras Tom Abree dale farm netanyahu protests pay capitalism spain housing action value stealing plaid cymru blockupy socialist rape culture womens liberation state bjp kerry mcgettigan deep state riots pay gap yes scotland estate m18 interviews loans nypd literature tuition fees big pharma communities bingo conchita localism evictions economics rent business Adam Ramsay tories nationalism eurozone whiteness isis putin memes tuc mob refusal of work privatisaton marketing facebook golden dawn bnp usa social reproduction occupy internet maps ncafc clr james libdems feminism kurdistan future he technology precarious europe natalie bennett 15m uber buy-to-let kobane miners strike landlords new democracy brazil consumption cost of living neoliberalism anti-capitalism dan whittall omar aziz olympics Aaron Bastani interest airstrikes antiziganism krugman snp privatization culture tactics midwives free speech Police Tuzla UKIP strike ethics david harvey lgbt housing radical lives ge2015 England miliband tax evasion china utopia start up cuts television crime bias rob ford sussex five gaza reappropriation israel workfare greens higher education gypsies precariousness universal basic income financialisation employment demands edl pasokification holocaust ulu asylum right to buy asn morsi journalism people's assembly birmingham refusal catalonia football class struggle workplace reappropriation marx roma privacy Economy irish water direct action christmas trans rbi apps Claudia Jones james meek london zero hours space synthetic hedge james meadway eire uffc cup reproductive rights mark zuckerberg angela mcrobie native rpi housing crisis maria miller law pfi al qaeda manifesto automation mike brown isil alia al ghussain comedy protest aboriginal Policing cooperatives

4 Reasons Why Technological Unemployment Might Really Be Different This Time

submit to reddit

The media has been awash with stories about machines taking jobs and leaving us stranded on the side of an automated economy. This has been strengthened by more academic takes which estimate anywhere from 47-80% of current jobs will be automatable in the near future.

Yet critics point to the history of automation and suggest otherwise. The replacement of humans with machines has been central to capitalism since its origins, but it has yet to lead to mass unemployment. On the basis of this historical record, critics argue there’s nothing to fear and new jobs will be created for everyone. But might this time really be different?

1. In the past there was widespread political support to create jobs.

We all know the economy is also a political entity, and without support from governments, capitalism would be an even bigger mess than it already is. But equally, previous periods of automation have also involved heavy political intervention in order to maintain growth in employment.

The postwar era is emblematic of this – the automation of manufacturing and logistics continued apace, but this process was also supported by an overt commitment to full employment. Governments used various tools in order to ensure that new markets were opening up, new industries were emerging, and new products were available to produce. This was premised, moreover, on a relatively healthy growing economy. Today, in an age of secular stagnation and austerity, it’s hard to see that this sort of growth and devotion to job creation will occur.

2. Earlier periods of automation coincided with significant reductions in the working week.

It’s often forgotten, but the earlier stages of capitalism and automation were also periods where the labour movement made major strides in reducing work time. Between 1900 and the 1940s, for instance, the working week dropped from over 60 hours to 40 hours (and very nearly stabilised at 35 hours).

What this means is that the same amount of work was distributed more evenly across the work force. Technological unemployment is less of an issue when the working week is being reduced, yet the movement for shorter working weeks has largely been silent since the Second World War. This is one reason why a 21st century left should take up the struggle for less work.

3. There used to be job sectors that displaced workers could move into.

Earlier moments of automation involved massive shifts in labour from one sector to another. But while this was a major change, it was relatively easy for agricultural workers to switch to factory work and eventually to call centre and other service work (even if it was hard to imagine so many moving to these jobs). These are jobs which are often purposefully deskilled, and therefore where the training needed for them is relatively common or easy to learn.

Today is different though. To be sure, the newest wave of automation is leaving some jobs to humans. Work involving creativity, problem-solving, and social intelligence are all off-limits to automation for the time being. But these are mostly high-skilled, high-waged jobs, and they are often jobs that are difficult not only for machines, but also for humans.

In the earliest waves of automation (for example the mechanisation of craft work), the biggest section of the labour market under threat was relatively high-skilled workers who posed a threat to capitalists and management. Low-skilled jobs were both cheap and relatively easy to discipline, and offered numerous outlets for displaced workers. Yet today, it is largely low-skilled, low-waged jobs (both manual and cognitive) which are under threat – a situation which makes this wave of automation significantly different from previous ones.

4. The outcome of automation is a political choice.

The biggest reason this time may be different though is that society’s response to automation determines how it will play out. A future-oriented left could easily accept automation and focus its efforts on a struggle to build a post-work society. We could push for more automation, we could reduce the working week, and we could resist capitalism’s tendency to leave us as a surplus population. This sort of collective political project would see the newest wave of automation as an opportunity to drastically change our societies.

And in this case, things could be different.